Terrain Guru needed

[dshall]

1 hour ago, mwarch said:

Scott, on a recent thread (elevation data point problem) glenn advised that a change of terrain surface smoothing to linear would remove peaks & troughs. Is it possible that you played with this setting in terrain defaults after viewing that post, that then affected your plans when you opened them?

I'm still perplexed by the terrain mysteries of when to use linear terrain smoothing, could glenn (the zeus of ca) please find some time to enlighten this mere mortal with a video on terrains

many thanks

 

 

I remember the thread and you may be correct that I changed to linear as a test after reading Glenn's solution.

[dshall]

Good topic for DSH 20 MINUTE WORKSHOP  

[CJSpud]

Isn't 20 minutes way too much time for this topic?  If you do one, I would love to sit in on it.

[DRAWZILLA]

20 min. is too short for me, it will be tough to keep in any time limits. We have so much fun, we really don't notice where the time went. We also learn so much, you can't find anywhere else.

[CJSpud]

Too short for "too tall" .... does that figure.  I will probably need to have a full pot of coffee handy for a GTM on terrain.

[dshall]

8 minutes ago, DRAWZILLA said:

20 min. is too short for me, it will be tough to keep in any time limits. We have so much fun, we really don't notice where the time went. We also learn so much, you can't find anywhere else.

 

Hi Perry,  20 minutes is too short,  that is why I extended it to 30 minutes max.  

 

My thought on this was it would require us to be focused,  which means we would ignore ALAN "the funniest man alive" LEHMAN,  and get the job done.  Also,  if we stayed focused and kept the time spent at a minimum,  we might be able to do more workshops.  It would be a learning session on steroids.  I am keeping notes on possible topics.

 

I am excited about this.  The more heavy hitters who participate in the workshops,   the more we will learn,  and the heavy hitters will educate the future heavy hitters.

 

So you guys who do not think you have anything to contribute,  no worries,  join in,    you will learn and contribute later.  

[CJSpud]

Thanks Scott, Glen, et. al.

 

I wasn't watching my emails and didn't realize you were doing it today so missed out on at least half the meeting ... darn. 

 

With regards to Chopsaw's comments about points, I think they can be useful in some situations.  Many versions of Chief ago, Roger Rhines posted a simple plan with a nice terrain on it and in that plan, he used quite a few elevation points to build his terrain model.  I don't know if I still have it on my old computer, but if I do, I will post it in a new thread on Terrain Points.

Scott:  Are you going to summarize this meeting's nuggets?  Someone else?

Thanks again.

[Rich_Winsor]

To follow up on the debate over using Elevation Points vs. Terrain Regions

to input the terrain data, I had a play comparing the results of identical

terrain data with one set input as Elevation Points and one set input as

Terrain Regions. I created a simple 50' X 50' grid with 25 markers set on

equal intervals and assigned elevation heights to them. See chart below:

Then I created 2 plans. One using the data input as Elevation Points and

the second inputting the data as 25 two inch by two inch square Terrain

Regions. In the view below the top plan was created using the Elevation

Points and the bottom plan used the Terrain Regions. I didn't know what

to expect, but to my eye the Elevation Points generated a much smoother

looking terrain. I realize this is a very simple test, but I may have to throw

my lot in with Chopsaw on this one. I like the Elevation Point version best.

[Chopsaw]

Very Nice Rich,  I would usually use a 10' grid on a large lot that does not need pinpoint accuracy and a 3' grid on a smaller lot or something that needs to be precise.  12.5' seems to have worked fine for your example.  2500 sq. ft. of paradise eh.  Chief does work for terrains but I just wish it was a little easier to figure out the rules and control the variables.

[glennw]

I think that using Terrain Regions to do that is just plain daft.

[dshall]

2 hours ago, glennw said:

I think that using Terrain Regions to do that is just plain daft.

 

I think your approach would be elevation lines,  no argument here.

 

Interesting test Rich,  note the depression in the elevation point example.

 

 

[lbuttery]

I am terrain stupid

 

but I'm curious about using terrain regions 2 x 2 inch

seems kinda small for a "region"

 

to have 25 "regions" seems overkill

 

just guessing

 

Lew

[Rich_Winsor]

16 hours ago, lbuttery said:

I am terrain stupid

 

but I'm curious about using terrain regions 2 x 2 inch

seems kinda small for a "region"

 

to have 25 "regions" seems overkill

 

just guessing

 

Lew

 

It's one of those deals where you had to be there Lew.

Scott was trying to achieve the same results we got

with Elevation Points by essentially creating "point"

sized Terrain Regions. For my own edification I was

trying to quantify the results by doing a more controlled

experiment.

[lbuttery]

Rich:

 

but that's the "point"

point sized terrain regions seem counter-productive

 

if trying to create terrain X using method A or B

forcing method B to act like method A ???

 

Lew